THE mother of a Clifton teenager who was taken to court after a 'prank' has said it should never have got that far.

Debra Nicholls, of Fielders Way, has said it was a waste of tax-payers money to take her son Christopher Nicholls to court after he was charged with administering a noxious substance and being carried in a stolen car.

The charges were brought after a video was found on the internet of Christopher, 19, and three friends saying they had administered Night Nurse to a friend, James Godwin, without his knowledge. Pictures of them joy-riding were then put on the web.

At Minshull Street Crown Court in Manchester, Christopher was found not guilty of administering a noxious substance. He admitted being carried in a stolen car and was fined £250 with £150 costs.

Mrs Nicholls said: "I've been through 10 months of this with my son, he's got an impeccable record, he's never had a caution or been in a police station before.

"Yes, he allowed himself to be carried in a vehicle but it wasn't stolen, it was his friend's car.

"Yes, he's stupid, he's admitted that, but this has wasted tax-payers' money, which could have been spent on schools or children."

Mrs Nicholls says a charge of conspiracy to administer a noxious substance was dropped when her son agreed to plead guilty to being carried in a stolen car.

She added: "For my lad there was no evidence of conspiracy, he wasn't even on the video.

"There was no toxicology report and no evidence that James Godwin had anything put in his drink - the joke was the video, they were just saying they were going to do it and they were going to show him the next day."

Speaking in court Judge Roger Thomas QC said: "It's tomfoolery and a prank, but it's a criminal offence. You all come from decent homes and backgrounds but now have criminal convictions, which isn't a prank."

A spokesman from the Crown Prosecution Service said: "The police referred the case to the Crown Prosecution Service. The duty lawyer considered the case and applied the CPS code.

"They found there was sufficient evidence to proceed and that it was in the public interest."